Hmmmmm… Maybe you go to your store’s court and plead your case.
Wait, your store doesn’t have such a court for the adjudication of workplace injustices? Guess you’re shit outta luck then.
In other words, Mary has (constructively) told your employer: The terms of our employer-employee arrangement are that I will not work past eight o’clock. This is totally a deal your employer can make and does not need your approval to do so.
If you don’t like it … Good news! We live in a Free Country™ (assuming you live in America). Go find another job.
They’re all getting paid by the hour, right? So what’s the big deal? If they all want to punch out early instead of staying and making more money, maybe they should rethink if they really want to work there.
That being said, if multiple employees want to cut out early, it’s totally up to the mgr’s discretion who to send home. You all need to get over this idea of universal “fairness”.
I’ve employed a few folks in my time. I grew up in a family business, and have seen plenty of kid/puppy/plumbing/illness drama.
We all have problems, and it seems to me that accommodating them when possible is good for everyone. If Mary gets ill, and takes a day or two, should everyone else get 2 free days that week or month? No, but when one of them tells me their kid/mom/neighbor/parrot needs them right now, I say go. It all gets worked out.
When my firstborn was born, we both stayed home for 3 months or so, then it was back to work for Mrs. We dropped Jr. off at daycare,:eek: cried our way to our offices, and started working. Wife’s boss asked why she’s upset and she told him she just had to leave Jr. at daycare for the first time. “Fuck that, bring him in. We’ll make it work.”
And for about 4 years they did. He became a fixture, and it actually worked out.
He eventually went to Pre-K and Kindergarden, but then little sis came along.
She only made it 2 years before grabbing the boss’s wife’s dress on one of her rare visits to the office. “Oh look. A baby in an office. How cute.”
She was deported and off to a sweatshop that week.* Some people just can’t get on board…
Can’t we all just get along?
What I meant is that then they could get someone who could be more flexible when it comes to the closing shift. However, after hearing what a shitty worker Mary is, it’s not like it matters.
Several people have indicated this could be a case of discrimination based on familial status, but I do not believe that to be the case, at least in the US. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces job dicrimination laws and their web page includes the following list of protected classes in regard to employment:
“Familial status” is a protected class under Federal Fair Housing regulations, but that only states that landlords cannot discriminate against families with children under 18 years old, except in the case of adult communities.
Which confirms what I said before - you have a shitty manager who is caving in to her demands. What is she supposed to do, keep quiet and not volunteer? If she wants to go home, she’s free to say she wants to go home when she’s asked. It’s the manager making the decision. If he’s unfairly giving it to her more often than he should (for which we have only your word), then that’s on him. Not Mary. If you have an employee bitching and moaning about your decision, then it’s your job as a manager to deal with that. Just giving in to her is a terrible way of dealing.
Indeed. “I want to go home to see my puppy” isn’t remotely as convincing as “I want to go home to see my child.” Kids who get less attention from loving adults end up having a lot more trouble at home, at school, and in life. The parent who is giving their kid a lot of the right kind of attention is doing a public service: they’re not obligated to do so, but by doing so, they’re helping to form a better human being, and in a few years, that fellow human being may impact your own life. This isn’t nearly as true when you’re talking about a puppy.
Am I the only one wondering if she is pulling a fast one on everyone? Cmon, she doesn’t have to PROVE that she has a kid, the manager just takes her word for it.
I had a friend who worked at a place similarly inconsistent. But in their case, it was ‘smoke breaks’. Smoke breaks were loosely defined as a 5-10 minute break to go have a cigarette, on top of your lunch break and other scheduled breaks. My friend didn’t smoke, so of course at first he thought this was massively unfair to non-smokers (who weren’t given a similar excuse). His solution was simple- he carried around a pack of cigarettes, and when he wanted to take an occasional breather would tell his boss he needed a ‘smoke break’, step out back with an unlit cigarette in his mouth, and enjoyed the reprieve.
this. I’ve been lucky enough to work for places where- so long as there wasn’t a pattern of shirking responsibilities- people were able to attend to family needs regardless of what they were. Need to cut out early to pick up sick kid from school? Fine. Need to take dog/cat to vet? fine. Elderly parent has a dr. appointment? Do what you got to do.
but if you use any of those things to repeatedly leave your co-workers holding the bag, well, then piss off.
It’s not that a family with kids is more important than other families, it’s that kids, especially young ones, are fully dependent on their parents and have more immediate needs. If I need to work late, my husband is perfectly capable of ordering a pizza and entertaining himself for a few hours. My book club may miss me, but I’m sure they’ll get along without me. But kids can’t take care of themselves like that.
Likewise, I’m comfortable making allowances for people taking care of elderly parents, sick husbands, whatever. But I do think taking care of dependents, and attending to real responsibilities, does call for a little more flexibility.
jz, and thats exactly it, right there. She repeatedly as a way of life expects to leave all other employees holding the bag…i would be more than understanding if for ex she had a newborn, or newly adopted child, or her older kid was sick, etc etc but she knows closing shift is til 9, and expects to always be the only one who gets off at 8 those times its offered. There have been times she will, after another employee mentions theyll go early, run roughshod over them and demand to the manager that she should take their place. She never made any arrangement when hired,but just constantly throws it out there, how she ‘had kids’…i know a lady who was an egg donor and now has a bio kid out there somewnere, i guess she could technically use this, lol, she also ‘has kids’
I give props to the cigarette break guy…and I think it could be used in a similar way for this situation…employees can say they have ‘kids’…now whether that refers to a boyfriend, dependent husband who wants your time and attention, a dog who is just like your kid, etc. does not need to be defined
It is only the difference of one hour,…and presumably she left her kids with a responsible adult when she is at work, so its not that her kids are left hanging somewhere alone. She knows the shift ends at nine, and so her kids are already being cared for until nine.
This isn’t really about flexibility - it’s not that Maria once in a while asks to leave early because she’s got a sick kid or she needs to leave early one particular night because of child-care issues or she needs to pick up her car from the shop..Everybody, even those without children, needs that kind of flexibility sometimes.This is (according to Tollhouse) someone who expects to always be the one who can leave early if anyone does. She presumably has arranged childcare until 9, as it doesn’t seem she can leave at 8 every day, so it’s not a matter of her children being home alone.
And yes, the manager is caving to her demands, and shouldn’t be. But on a strictly practical level, yeah, Maria ought to keep quiet sometimes. Sure, it’s the manager who decides who gets to go home early. But what happens when Maria wants to trade her Tuesday off for Antonio’s Friday off (or whatever favors coworkers can do for each other in this store)? I’ll tell you what’s not going to happen. Antonio is not going to feel that it’s the manager’s fault that Maria is always the one who gets to leave early and be glad to help her out. He’s going to think that she’s the one who insisted on leaving early, even after the manager told him he could and refuse the switch.
And for anyone who’s under the impression that this is a “people with children” vs “people without children” issue, you are wrong. If you think those without children get annoyed about people who use their children as an excuse , wait till you see someone **with **children asked to pick up the slack because “Maria can’t (take a business trip, work until 9 when that’s her shift, whatever) because she has children”
^ this. I get that people with children need flexibility. so long as I get afforded the same flexibility to deal with outside-of-work issues, I have no problem.
